EPT##Vote: Drazerk
Surprisingly Normal Mini Mafia IV - Page 9
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
aprudds
Canada144 Posts
##Vote: Drazerk | ||
|
gtrsrs
United States9109 Posts
i think the logical thing to do for now is to remove your votes from Drazerk in my earlier post i said i was leaning to someone, and that person is Drazerk, but the point remains that Lord Vatti is suspiciously MIA. here's what potentially could happen: 1. Lord Vatti is townie without a role, saw that he didn't have a role, and afk'd out of the game. he will be modkilled. he could even be mafia but i doubt it. 2. the town votes for Drazerk on what can only be described as moderate-at-best suspicions. 2a. Drazerk flips townie. we're now down 2 townies and 0 mafia. it's as if 2 nights have passed (via 2 mafia kills) but we'll only have the info from 1 night's worth of night actions (if we even *have* any blues). 2b. Drazerk flips mafia. our hunches were correct. high five town. 2c. Drazerk flips power role. oh shit, his increased activity was because he's got a more prominent role. fuck our lives. 3. the town votes for Lord Vatti. since he was queued up to be modkilled, we lose nothing, and get a free night of investigations, potential saves, both, or neither. so with all that in mind, and noting that i'm NOT defending Drazerk (for he is my FoS at the moment, but it is an extremely weak FoS), i still think we should pile the votes onto Lord Vatti instead. best case scenario we kill an afk mafia. worst case scenario we lose a townie that we would have lost anyways. if we keep our votes on drazerk, the worst-case goes up to losing 2 townies. so with that in mind, i think that until Lord Vatti shows up to contribute, no matter how big of a hunch/suspicion we have of Drazerk, we should not vote him until we're all present. once Lord Vatti shows up i'm all for pressuring Drazerk, i just don't want to lose 2 townies on day 1 | ||
|
CjrNinja
Australia223 Posts
So... we're wasting our day one lynch on a modkill, losing a townie night one, then spending the next day lynching the guy most people had been voting for day one? That's 2 wasted lynches... | ||
|
Treadmill
Canada2833 Posts
Lord Vatti hasn't posted but Drazerk hasn't posted with any content (list of inactives, yeah!). My vote stays on Drazerk until he does. | ||
|
CjrNinja
Australia223 Posts
Scum will join the Lord Vatti bandwagon, regardless of his alignment (If Lord Vatti is scum, then remaining mafia can pull a Munk-E and bus their scumbuddy by agreeing to your plan, once it becomes apparent that he will be modkilled). If scum are on this voting list, it gets town nowhere closer to knowing who is red by day 2, essentially making that day's lynch as 'random' as Day 1's lynch. You should be voting for scum, you said yourself that Drazerk was your current FoS. Of course it's going to be an extremely weak FoS, unless a scum really fucks up and scumslips on day 1, you'll be hard pressed to have a solid FoS, but we need to start somewhere. What I'm trying to say is that the only thing I see lynching an inactive does is stall the game for town by another day, which will give mafia the advantage of a few free townkills. In order to get a hold on this game, we need to take a stance and lynch the scummiest person. | ||
|
aprudds
Canada144 Posts
Let me see break this down with less fluff Lord Vatti might not even show up and get modkilled therefore we should waste our lynch on him? Sorry, but what kind of scummy ass backwards ass logic is that? Might I remind you that there are no vigilantes this game. Lynching is the only way for us to fight scum. Let's see what we gain by doing a AFK lynch. Oh wait, we gain nothing! We will start day 2 with no information from a lynch, a modkill and a mafia kill. the town votes for Lord Vatti. since he was queued up to be modkilled, we lose nothing, and get a free night of investigations, potential saves, both, or neither. What the hell mate. Incase you didn't know scum kill at night as well. What your suggesting is that we waste time, lose our lynch and wait on blue information. Terrible terrible plan. You vote for who you think is the most suspicious. That being said, I looked through the few posts there are carefully and realized I have been a bit hasty with my vote. ##Unvote ##Vote Alderan Oh no you don't Alderan. You don't get away with that. A bit too eager to jump on the bandwagon are we? Hoping Vatti comes and provides something useful. Posting something Useful you say? What have you done again? Your going to vote for him because it's the most logical choice? What logic? I don't see any. Keep in mind guys we're less than 24 hours in, I mean, I just woke up. Just like last game (I think almost all of us were in), a list of people who are posting very generic fluff and not helping the town is much more helpful than an inactive list. Huh, quite the 180 there scum . Go burn and die. | ||
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
Votecount, Day 1 Drazek(2) Pyo Treadmill Treadmill(1) supersoft Lord Vatti(3) gtrsrs Drazerk Alderan supersoft(1) CjrNinja Alderan(1) aprudds 18 and a half hours or so remain. Lord Vatti leading the vote count with three votes. Four people have yet to cast votes. Remember to BOLD your votes please ^_^. If I miscounted/missed a vote please point it out. | ||
|
gtrsrs
United States9109 Posts
how fair would this game be if, when we lynched a townie, mafia got 2 kills? that would suck right? well numerically, mislynching today would be the same. let's say Drazerk flips town. now mafia gets "2 kills" in Lord Vatti and someone else. at least Drazerk has the POTENTIAL to contribute at this point. LV's contributions are absolutely nothing. i'm glad you brought up the vigilante point aprudds. don't we know too well that just because a vigilante CAN kill someone at night, doesn't mean he SHOULD? likewise, now that lynching is our only KP, just because we CAN lynch someone doesn't mean we HAVE to, especially with a modkill on the block. and i know i look so scummy for this but i'm gonna stick with my guns here and ask you to vote for Lord Vatti til he shows up to give some input. this might just be the epicmafia vet in me speaking. but when we have someone who is actively lurking, we vote for them. most of the time once the votes pile up, they show up in the discussion. but if not, vote-kicking them is the best way to progress the game, as they would have "vegged out" and died anyways. as soon as LV shows up i'm happy to throw my vote on drazerk. but for the time being, i have *minimal* suspicion of drazerk. i'd rather make a harmless vote than vote for someone based on minimal suspicions. of course as soon as LV shows up, the *minimal* suspicion will be my greatest suspicion so i'll change then. but please don't let mafia jump up to a 3 kill advantage this early | ||
|
aprudds
Canada144 Posts
On June 19 2011 11:44 gtrsrs wrote: guys you need to look at this from a numbers standpoint how fair would this game be if, when we lynched a townie, mafia got 2 kills? that would suck right? well numerically, mislynching today would be the same. let's say Drazerk flips town. now mafia gets "2 kills" in Lord Vatti and someone else. at least Drazerk has the POTENTIAL to contribute at this point. LV's contributions are absolutely nothing. i'm glad you brought up the vigilante point aprudds. don't we know too well that just because a vigilante CAN kill someone at night, doesn't mean he SHOULD? likewise, now that lynching is our only KP, just because we CAN lynch someone doesn't mean we HAVE to, especially with a modkill on the block. and i know i look so scummy for this but i'm gonna stick with my guns here and ask you to vote for Lord Vatti til he shows up to give some input. this might just be the epicmafia vet in me speaking. but when we have someone who is actively lurking, we vote for them. most of the time once the votes pile up, they show up in the discussion. but if not, vote-kicking them is the best way to progress the game, as they would have "vegged out" and died anyways. as soon as LV shows up i'm happy to throw my vote on drazerk. but for the time being, i have *minimal* suspicion of drazerk. i'd rather make a harmless vote than vote for someone based on minimal suspicions. of course as soon as LV shows up, the *minimal* suspicion will be my greatest suspicion so i'll change then. but please don't let mafia jump up to a 3 kill advantage this early Your supporting a no lynch day one. We gain no info out of that, go 2 men down because of the modkill and night kill and then REPEAT DAY ONE ALL OVER AGAIN. So we have to take a risk, big deal. If we never took risks we would lose. Why are you fear mongering? What happened to the GTRSRS of last game who was tunneling with balls of steel. The only person that would benefit from a no lynch is scum. | ||
|
gtrsrs
United States9109 Posts
for now i am just afraid of starting the game down 3 townies instead of 2 | ||
|
aprudds
Canada144 Posts
On June 19 2011 12:49 gtrsrs wrote: i will tunnel with balls of steel once i actually have something to go on Q_Q for now i am just afraid of starting the game down 3 townies instead of 2 You realize you always have to take the risk of lynching and postponing it is only going to give the win to scum right? Who neutered you Gtr? Where is the prideful fearless motherfucker from last game? | ||
|
Treadmill
Canada2833 Posts
However a. there's still time for LV to pop up and NOT get modkilled b. there's still time for a semi-decent case against someone to be established. I'm still leaving my vote on Drazerk until he posts something with substance (or a better case arrives). | ||
|
aprudds
Canada144 Posts
On June 19 2011 13:10 Treadmill wrote: hrrm... I'd actually agree with gtrsrs' argument for once (somewhat). If we don't have a half-decent case against somebody by tomorrow I think that It WOULD be better to just lynch L.V. rather than do a semi-random lynch. However a. there's still time for LV to pop up and NOT get modkilled b. there's still time for a semi-decent case against someone to be established. I'm still leaving my vote on Drazerk until he posts something with substance (or a better case arrives). You realize with this mindset we are just going to be waiting till the dawn of time. Your going to "wait" for a better case to come? What you think scum are just going to barge in and yell HERE I AM COME AND GET ME? | ||
|
Treadmill
Canada2833 Posts
On June 19 2011 13:14 aprudds wrote: You realize with this mindset we are just going to be waiting till the dawn of time. Your going to "wait" for a better case to come? What you think scum are just going to barge in and yell HERE I AM COME AND GET ME? As opposed to your path which is "its day one and there's obviously enough evidence for me to be 100% certain xyz is scum"? Waiting to see what people say when they post more is prudent. And if they don't post anything then that tells us something too. Also, your case against Alderan? Shitty. | ||
|
aprudds
Canada144 Posts
On June 19 2011 13:23 Treadmill wrote: As opposed to your path which is "its day one and there's obviously enough evidence for me to be 100% certain xyz is scum"? Waiting to see what people say when they post more is prudent. And if they don't post anything then that tells us something too. Also, your case against Alderan? Shitty. Oh so you will only lynch when your 100% certain someone is scum? I guess you will never lynch anyone then unless you get a DT role. How convenient. Your relying on being passive and hoping people out themselves. Do you think scum is just going to jump out and say LYNCH ME PLZ ^_^ with everyone just sitting around and 'waiting'? No waiting is what scum want, to slowly pass the days along picking us off one by one. I realize we don't want a mislynch but if we aren't active and surrender the first day to scum without even trying to fight back what does that leave us in day 2? Exactly where we started, waiting for more information. | ||
|
Pyo
United States738 Posts
There are 3 people that stand out to me so far: Drazek, who was post a lot more than he used to until I called him out on it aprudds, who was mafia last time, which makes me think that he's town this time alderan, who has only posted twice (contradicting himself as aprudds pointed out) supersoft, who has only a couple times then gave the excuse of "i'll be away for a while" For now I'm going to leave my vote on Drazek, but we should be highly suspicious of alderan and supersoft. there is a 1/4 chance that any given individual is mafia. This means that if we have fewer than 4 suspects, it is a winning strategy to randomly pick one of them and lynch that person. If we have 4 or more suspects, then it would be better to not vote at all, or in this case to vote for the person who is about to be modkilled. So when it comes to voting for Lord Vatti, ask your self, "are there 4 people or more who are very suspicious?" If the answer is yes, vote for him. If the answer is no, pick on of the others. | ||
|
Treadmill
Canada2833 Posts
@aprudds: sorry, I don't mean to be passive. Partly I'm just a little uncertain considering how absolutely wrong I was about everything last game. I actually agree with you that we should lynch whomever seems most suspicious, not go after L.V. for being inactive. But I think we have around 12 hours for people to post and possibly slip up. No, people won't shout "I am mafia" but they may contradict themselves or make spurious arguments. | ||
|
aprudds
Canada144 Posts
On June 19 2011 14:01 Treadmill wrote: Your logic is kinda crappy, Pyo. You're assuming that if we have, say, 3 suspects, that one (and exactly one) must be red. Which is obviously not the case. Also, don't metagame too much, its entirely possible that aprudds got mafia twice in a row. @aprudds: sorry, I don't mean to be passive. Partly I'm just a little uncertain considering how absolutely wrong I was about everything last game. I actually agree with you that we should lynch whomever seems most suspicious, not go after L.V. for being inactive. But I think we have around 12 hours for people to post and possibly slip up. No, people won't shout "I am mafia" but they may contradict themselves or make spurious arguments. You realize that "I'm uncertain how wrong I was" was the EXACT card I played last game to get people off me when I was scum  Don't get demotivated because of last game, this is a much smaller game, it will be much harder to lurk compared to the lurking scum did last game. | ||
|
Pyo
United States738 Posts
On June 19 2011 14:01 Treadmill wrote: Your logic is kinda crappy, Pyo. You're assuming that if we have, say, 3 suspects, that one (and exactly one) must be red. Which is obviously not the case. Also, don't metagame too much, its entirely possible that aprudds got mafia twice in a row. @aprudds: sorry, I don't mean to be passive. Partly I'm just a little uncertain considering how absolutely wrong I was about everything last game. I actually agree with you that we should lynch whomever seems most suspicious, not go after L.V. for being inactive. But I think we have around 12 hours for people to post and possibly slip up. No, people won't shout "I am mafia" but they may contradict themselves or make spurious arguments. The point isn't that if you suspect that 3 people are mafia than 1 has to be, it's that if you can reasonably eliminate some people off the list of suspects then it becomes a winning strategy to pick from the remaining randomly. Basically, a non-lynch is better than a mislynch as gtrsrs points out. There's a 3/4 chance of a mislynch, so to actually lynch someone, you need to be better than 3/4 certain that the lynch target is guilty. It's somewhat subjective, but I feel as though if you can reasonably eliminate 8 of the other 11 people out there, then placing your vote on one of the remaining 3 people. Also you missed my point about aprudds. I'm simply pointing out that given that there's nothing else going on, noticing differences in behavior are more substantial grounds for accusation than random tunneling. aprudds changing his posting patterns doesn't really mean much since last time he was mafia. I brought him up as a comparison to Drazek who noticeably changed his posting pattern but was town last time. aprudds is also pretty good at this game from what I can tell, which makes him quite dangerous in and of itself so you should be suspicious of him regardless. The purpose of the accusation against Drazek was to apply serious pressure, since I have a semi-legitimate reason to go after him. A couple people followed suit, and he dropped off the grid. This makes Drazek extremely suspicious. | ||
|
omgCRAZY
Canada551 Posts
Lord Vatti: I don't think we should waste a lynch on a modkill for any reason. If we lynch someone with the most evidence that we can muster as a group we have an ok chance of hitting mafia. If we do hit a townie we will at the very least have a lot of information to work off of. Drazerk: Has been going after inactives/lurkers hard but has not been generating any good discussion. He made some weird arguments earlier on but nothing too scummy. I am ok with pressuring lurkers but their needs to be discussion going on as well. Drazerk please try to add to some analysis and don't start lurking now that the pressure is on you. This is where you need to step up the most. Alderan: While there is some discrepancies between what he is saying I don't think it is as significant as aprudds thinks it is. gtrsrs: As others have noted. His play has changed from his last game of mafia where he was town. Treadmill: Initially started the plan to have DT out himself (thought Mafia had 2 KP) which is understandable given that he missed that part of the rules. But after realising his mistake he still argues for the DT to out himself which I find scummy as it would be much more helpful for the mafia than the town. He does go on to support gtrsrs' case about lynching a modkill if we don't have a really strong case against someone (which will be very hard to find Day 1). aprudds points out how Treadmill is using the same defense he did in the previous mafia game when apprudds was mafia. Treadmill seems to advocate waiting to lynch until we have a really solid case yet votes for someone with a really weak case and then backs up wasting a lynch... scummy. I am keeping an eye on you Treadmill. Overall: I think wasting a lynch on a modkill is a terrible idea and I think we should be suspicious of anyone who is advocating it. We need to analyze and generate discussion AND pressure lurkers to do the same. Need to be careful that we don't let people silently jump on votes or just repeat/agree what others have said without adding to the discussion. | ||
| ||
